Chumashחומש

מכל מצות ה'. פֵּרְשׁוּ רַבּוֹתֵינוּ אֵין חַטָּאת בָּאָה אֶלָּא עַל דָּבָר שֶׁזְּדוֹנוֹ לָאו וְכָרֵת (ספרא):

'מכל מצות ה [IF A SOUL SIN IN ERROR] AGAINST ANY OF THE COMMANDMENTS OF THE LORD — Our Rabbis explained (Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Chovah, Section 7; Shabbat 69a) that a sin-offering (of which this chapter speaks) is brought only for such a thing the wilful committal of which is forbidden by a לאו (a negative command) and is subject to the penalty of excision).

מאחת מהנה. מִמִּקְּצָת אַחַת מֵהֶן, כְּגוֹן הַכּוֹתֵב בְּשַׁבָּת שם מִשִּׁמְעוֹן, נח מִנָּחוֹר, דן מִדָּנִיֵּאל (שם):

מאחת מהנה — The prefix in מאחת, being the partitive מ, suggests: even if one infringes only a part of one of them. as, for instance, if one writes on Sabbath the two letters שם of the name שמעון having intended to write the whole word, or the letters נח of the word נחור, or דן of דניאל (Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Chovah, Chapter 1 4; Shabbat 103b).

אם הכהן המשיח יחטא לאשמת העם. מִדְרָשׁוֹ: אֵינוֹ חַיָּב אֶלָּא בְּהֶעְלֵם דָּבָר עִם שִׁגְגַת מַעֲשֶֹה, כְּמוֹ שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר לְאַשְׁמַת הָעָם וְנֶעְלַם דָּבָר מֵעֵינֵי הַקָּהָל וְעָשׂוּ (שם); וּפְשׁוּטוֹ לְפִי אַגָּדָה: כְּשֶׁכֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל חוֹטֵא, אַשְׁמַת הָעָם הוּא זֶה, שֶׁהֵן תְּלוּיִין בּוֹ לְכַפֵּר עֲלֵיהֶם וּלְהִתְפַּלֵּל בַּעֲדָם, וְנַעֲשֶׂה מְקֻלְקָל:

אם הכהן המשיח יחטא לאשמת העם IF THE PRIEST THAT IS ANOINTED DO SIN לאשמת העם — The Halachic explanation is that he is liable to bring a sin-offering only when there was ignorance of the real matter (of the law in question; i. e. after having considered the case in question he came to a wrong decision) together with a mistaken action (i. e. where he erred in a Halachic decision and as a result of this error acted against the true law), just as it is stated with reference to the guilt of the whole people): (v. 13) “[And if the whole congregation of Israel err] and the thing be hid from the eyes of the assembly and they have done [somewhat against the commandments of the Lord]" (Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Chovah, Chapter 2 1; Horayot 7a; Rashi on v. 13). Its literal sense is according to the Agadic explanation: When the High-priest sins this is the guilt of the people (i. e. it results in the people remaining under a load of guilt), because they are dependent on him to effect atonement for them and to pray on their behalf, and now he himself has become degenerate and can thus not expiate for them, wherefor they remain under guilt.

פר. יָכוֹל זָקֵן, תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר בֶּן, אִי בֶּן יָכוֹל קָטָן, תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר פַּר, הָא כֵּיצַד? זֶה פַּר בֶּן שָׁלוֹשׁ (שם):

פר A BULLOCK — One might think that it may be an old one! Scripture, however, adds בן, a young animal. If, then, it must be בן, a young one, I might think a very young animal is fitted too (this being also implied in the term בן)! Scripture, however, states פר! How is this to be reconciled? By explaining פר בן בקר to be a bullock of three years (which is neither too old nor too young) (Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Chovah, Chapter 3 1; cf. Rashi on Leviticus 9:7 and Note thereon).

אל אהל מועד. לַמִּשְׁכָּן, וּבְבֵית עוֹלָמִים לַהֵיכָל:

אל אהל מועד‎ [AND THE PRIEST … SHALL BRING IT] TO THE APPOINTED TENT — to the Tabernacle — and, later, in the House of Eternity (the Temple at Jerusalem), into the Heichal (cf. Rashi on Exodus 29:43).

את פני פרכת הקדש. כְּנֶגֶד מְקוֹם קְדֻשָּׁתָהּ — מְכֻוָּן כְּנֶגֶד בֵּין הַבַּדִּים, וְלֹא הָיוּ נוֹגְעִים דָּמִים בַּפָּרֹכֶת, וְאִם נָגְעוּ נָגְעוּ:

את פני פרכת הקדש [AND THE PRIEST SHALL … SPRINKLE OF THE BLOOD …] BEFORE THE PARTITION VAIL OF THE קדש — i.e. before that spot where it is exceedingly holy — exactly in front of the space between the staves of the Ark (Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Chovah, Section 3 10). The blood did not touch the Partition Vail (since he was standing some distance off), but if it happened to touch it, then it touched it, (and it did not invalidate the ceremony) (Yoma 57a).

ואת כל דם. שְׁיָרֵי הַדָּם (זבחים כ"ה):

ואת כל דם AND ALL THE BLOOD — i. e. all the remainder of the blood (since part of it had already been sprinkled) (Zevachim 25a).

ואת כל חלב פר. חֶלְבּוֹ הָיָה לוֹ לוֹמַר, מַה תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר פַּר? לְרַבּוֹת פַּר שֶׁל יוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים לִכְלָיוֹת וְלַחֲלָבִים וְיוֹתֶרֶת (ספרא):

ואת כל חלב פר [AND HE SHALL TAKE UP …] ALL THE FAT OF THE BULLOCK — It ought to have said “its fat” (since the פר has just been mentioned); why does it state expressly “the fat of a bullock [of a sin-offering]” (i.e. any bullock brought as a sin-offering)? In order to include also the bullock of the Day of Atonement in respect to the burning of the kidneys, the fat portions and the lobe (Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Chovah, Chapter 4 1).

החטאת. לְהָבִיא שְֹעִירֵי עֲ"זָ לִכְלָיוֹת וְלַחֲלָבִים וּלְיוֹתֶרֶת (שם):

החטאת — [THE FAT OF THE BULLOCK OF] THE SIN OFFERING (implying, the fat of the bullock because it is a sin-offering) consequently serves to include the goats brought as a sin-offering for idolatry (Numbers 15:24) in respect to the burning of the kidneys, the fat portions and the lobe of the liver (Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Chovah, Chapter 4 1; cf. Note on the previous passage).

ירים ממנו. מִן הַמְחֻבָּר — שֶׁלֹּא יְנַתְּחֶנּוּ קֹדֶם הֲסָרַת חֶלְבּוֹ, תּוֹרַת כֹּהֲנִים:

ירים ממנו AND HE SHALL TAKE FROM IT [ALL THE FAT] — from. “it”, i. e. from the bullock — consequently he must take it (the fat) whilst it is still connected with it (the animal), — that he must not dismember it before removing the fat from it. Thus is it explained in Torath Cohanim (Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Chovah, Chapter 4 1).

כאשר יורם. מֵאוֹתָן אֵמוּרִין הַמְפֹרָשִׁין בְּשׁוֹר זֶבַח הַשְּׁלָמִים; וְכִי מַה פֵּרֵשׁ בְּזֶבַח הַשְּׁלָמִים שֶׁלֹא פֵּרֵשׁ כָּאן? אֶלָּא לְהַקִּישׁוֹ לִשְׁלָמִים, מַה שְּׁלָמִים לִשְׁמָן אַף זֶה לִשְׁמוֹ, וּמָה שְׁלָמִים שָׁלוֹם לָעוֹלָם, אַף זֶה שָׁלוֹם לָעוֹלָם; וּבִשְׁחִיטַת קֳדָשִׁים מַצְרִיכוֹ לִלְמֹד הֵימֶנּוּ שֶׁאֵין לְמֵדִין לָמֵד מִן הַלָּמֵד בָּקֳדָשִׁים, בְּפֶרֶק אֵיזֶהוּ מְקוֹמָן (זבחים מ"ט):

כאשר יורם AS IT WAS TAKEN [FROM THE OX OF THE SACRIFICE OF THE PEACE OFFERINGS] — i. e. from those fat portions which are specified in the case of an ox brought as a sacrifice of peace-offerings. But what is specified in the case of a sacrifice of peace-offerings that is not specified here? Nothing at all! (Cf. Leviticus 3:3—4 with here.) What then is the force of the words כאשר יורם? But they are intended to declare it analogous to the peace-offerings: What is the case with שלמים? They must be burnt as such! So, too, must this be burnt as such!) And again what is the case with שלמים? They are intended to promote peace for the world! So, too, is this intended to promote peace for the world (Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Chovah, Chapter 4 2). In the Treatise on “the Slaughtering of Sacrifices” it (the passage 'כאשר יורם וכו‎) is stated to be necessary to deduce from it the rule that in the case of sacrifices we can derive no law from a law which is itself only derived from a text, and is not explicitly stated in Scripture. This is to be found in the chapter beginning with the words איזהו מקומן (Zevachim 49b).

על הכבד על הכליות. על ראשו ועל כרעיו. כֻּלָּן לְשׁוֹן תּוֹסֶפֶת הֵן, כְּמוֹ מִלְּבַד:

על הכבד על הכליות. על ראשו ועל כרעיו — All these words (על) are an expression denoting an addition — they meat: as much as “besides”.

אל מקום טהור. לְפִי שֶׁיֵּשׁ מִחוּץ לָעִיר מָקוֹם מוּכָן לְטֻמְאָה — לְהַשְׁלִיךְ אֲבָנִים מְנֻגָּעוֹת וּלְבֵית הַקְּבָרוֹת — הֻצְרַךְ לוֹמַר מִחוּץ לַמַּחֲנֶה זֶה — שֶׁהוּא חוּץ לָעִיר — שֶׁיְּהֵא הַמָּקוֹם טָהוֹר:

אל מקום טהור [EVEN THE WHOLE BULLOCK SHALL HE BRING FORTH WITHOUT THE CAMP] UNTO A CLEAN PLACE — Because there was outside the city (Jerusalem) a place intended for depositing unclean things viz., to cast there the plague-stricken stones (cf. Leviticus 14:45) and to serve as a place of burial, Scripture was compelled to state regarding this term “without the camp” — which in the case of Jerusalem, is identical with: “without the city” — that the place where it was to be burnt shall be a clean one.

מחוץ למחנה. חוּץ לְשָׁלוֹשׁ מַחֲנוֹת; וּבֵית עוֹלָמִים חוּץ לָעִיר, כְּמוֹ שֶׁפֵּרְשׁוּהוּ רַבּוֹתֵינוּ בְּמַסֶּכֶת יוֹמָא (דף ס"ח) וּבְסַנְהֶדְרִין (דף מ"ב):

מחוץ למחנה WITHOUT THE CAMP — i. e. without the three camps (מחנה שכינה, מחנה לויה ומחנה ישראל) ; and, in the case of the “House of Eternity” (the Temple), it was to be brought forth without the city, just as our Rabbis have explained it in Treatise Yoma 68a and in Treatise Sanhedrin 42b.

אל שפך הדשן. מָקוֹם שֶׁשּׁוֹפְכִין בּוֹ הַדֶּשֶׁן הַמְסֻלָּק מִן הַמִּזְבֵּחַ, כְּמוֹ שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר וְהוֹצִיא אֶת הַדֶּשֶׁן אֶל מִחוּץ לַמַּחֲנֶה (ויקרא ו'):

אל שפך הדשן means: to the place where the ashes that were removed from the altar were cast, as it is said (Leviticus 6:4) “and he shall bring out the ashes without the camp”.

על שפך הדשן ישרף. שֶׁאֵין תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר, אֶלָּא לְלַמֵּד שֶׁאֲפִלּוּ אֵין שָׁם דֶּשֶׁן (ספרא):

על שפך הדשן UPON THE PLACE FOR SHEDDING THE ASHES [SHALL IT BE BURNT] — This is something which need not have been stated (since it says immediately before, that it shall be brought forth to this spot), but it is intended to teach that even if at the time there happen to be no ashes there, the bullock shall nevertheless be burnt there (Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Chovah, Chapter 5 5; Pesachim 75b).

עדת ישראל. אֵלּוּ סַנְהֶדְרִין (שם):

עדת ישראל [AND IF THE WHOLE] CONGREGATION OF ISRAEL [ERR] — This is the Great Sanhedrin (Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Chovah, Section 4 2; cf. Horayot 4b).

ונעלם דבר. טָעוּ לְהוֹרוֹת בְּאַחַת מִכָּל כָּרֵתוֹת שֶׁבַּתּוֹרָה שֶׁהוּא מֻתָּר (הוריות ח'):

ונעלם דבר AND A THING (a matter of law) WAS HID [FROM THE EYES OF THE ASSEMBLY] — i. e. they (the Synhedrion) erred, deciding in respect to one of all those acts for which excision is, according to tradition), implicitly mentioned in the Torah that it is permissible (Horayot 8a).

הקהל ועשו. שֶׁעָשׂוּ צִבּוּר עַל פִּיהֶם:

הקהל ועשו — [AND THE THING BE HID FROM THE EYES OF] THE ASSEMBLY AND THEY HAVE DONE — It means that the assembly did according to their (the Sanhedrin’s) decision (cf. Horayot 2a).

את פני הפרכת. וּלְמַעְלָה הוּא אוֹמֵר אֶת פְּנֵי פָּרֹכֶת הַקֹּדֶשׁ מָשָׁל לְמֶלֶךְ שֶׁסָּרְחָה עָלָיו מְדִינָה, אִם מִעוּטָהּ סָרְחָה, פָּמַלְיָא שֶׁלּוֹ מִתְקַיֶּמֶת וְאִם כֻּלָּהּ סָרְחָה, אֵין פָּמַלְיָא שֶׁלּוֹ מִתְקַיֶּמֶת, אַף כָּאן, כְּשֶׁחָטָא כֹּהֵן מָשִׁיחַ עֲדַיִן שֵׁם קְדֻשַּׁת הַמָּקוֹם עַל הַמִּקְדָּשׁ, מִשֶּׁחָטְאוּ כֻּלָּם, חַס וְשָׁלוֹם נִסְתַּלְּקָה הַקְּדֻשָּׁה (זבחים מ"א):

את פני הפרכת [AND THE PRIEST SPRINKLE IT …] BEFORE THE PARTITION VAIL — But above (v. 6) Scripture states את פני פרכת הקדש? A parable! This may be compared to the case of a king against whom the country revolted. If it is only a minority of it that revolts his council (familia) still exists, but if the whole country revolts his council no longer exists. So, also, here: When the anointed priest alone sinned, the appelation of sanctity that is attached to the place still remains on the Sanctuary, but as soon as all of them have sinned the holiness, God forbid, disappears (Zevachim 41b).

יסוד מזבח העלה אשר פתח אהל מועד. זֶה יְסוֹד מַעֲרָבִי שֶׁהוּא כְּנֶגֶד הַפֶּתַח (שם נ"א):

יסוד מזבח העלה אשר פתח אהל מועד [AND HE SHALL POUR OUT ALL THE BLOOD AT] THE BASE OF THE ALTAR OF THE BURNT-OFFERING WHICH IS AT THE ENTRANCE OF THE APPOINTED TENT — this is the base on the west side, for it was that which was opposite to the entrance of the tent (cf. Zevachim 51a).

ואת כל חלבו ירים. אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא פֵּרֵשׁ כָּאן יוֹתֶרֶת וּשְׁתֵּי כְּלָיוֹת, לְמֵדִין הֵם מִוְּעָשָׂה לַפָּר כַּאֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה וְגוֹ' וּמִפְּנֵי מָה לֹא נִתְפָּרְשׁוּ בּוֹ? תָּנָא דְּבֵי רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל מָשָׁל לְמֶלֶךְ שֶׁזָּעַם עַל אוֹהֲבוֹ וּמִעֵט בְּסִרְחוֹנוֹ מִפְּנֵי חִבָּתוֹ (שם מ"א):

ואת כל חלבו ירים AND HE SHALL TAKE ALL HIS FAT — Although it does not expressly mention here the lobe of the liver and the two kidneys as portions that were to be taken (as it does in the case of the anointed priest’s sin-offering, v. 9) they may be derived from the statement (v. 20) “And he shall do with the bullock as he did [with the bullock of the sin-offering]”. But why are they not expressly mentioned? It was taught in the School of R. Ishmael: A parable! This may be compared to the case of a king who was angry with his friend and abridged the account of his offence because of the affection he bore him (Zevachim 41b). (Similarly Scripture does not give in detail all the rites that have to be carried out when the whole of the nation sins.)

ועשה לפר זֶה כאשר עשה לפר החטאת. כְּמוֹ שֶׁמְּפֹרָשׁ בְּפַר כֹּהֵן מָשִׁיחַ — לְהָבִיא יוֹתֶרֶת וּשְׁתֵּי כְּלָיוֹת שֶׁפֵּרֵשׁ שָׁם, מַה שֶּׁלֹא פֵּרֵשׁ כָּאן, וְלִכְפֹּל בְּמִצְוַת הָעֲבוֹדוֹת, לְלַמֵּד שֶׁאִם חִסֵּר אַחַת מִכָּל הַמַּתָּנוֹת פָּסוּל; לְפִי שֶׁמָּצִינוּ בַּנִּתָּנִין עַל הַמִּזְבֵּחַ הַחִיצוֹן שֶׁנְּתָנָן בְּמַתָּנָה אַחַת כִּפֵּר, הֻצְרַךְ לוֹמַר כָּאן שֶׁמַּתָּנָה אַחַת מֵהֶן מְעַכֶּבֶת (שם ל"ט):

ועשה לפר AND HE SHALL DO WITH THE BULLOCK — with this bullock —כאשר עשה לפר החטאת AS HE DID WITH THE BULLOCK FOR A SIN-OFFERING – i. e. as is expressly set forth in the case of the bullock of the anointed priest. This statement thus serves to bring under the command of offering the fat portions the lobe of the liver and the two kidneys which are not expressly mentioned there but which are not expressly mentioned here; and it serves also to repeat the command referring to these rites, teaching thereby that if he (the anointed priest) omitted one of all the applications of the blood it (the sacrifice) becomes invalid (Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Chovah, Chapter 6 5). Since we find in regard to blood which had to be placed on the outer altar, that if he places it there by one application alone he nevertheless effected atonement (cf. Mish. Zevachim 4:1), Scripture was compelled to intimate here that the omission of one application impedes the validity of the rite (Zevachim 39a).

אשר נשיא יחטא. לְשׁוֹן אַשְׁרֵי — אַשְׁרֵי הַדּוֹר שֶׁהַנָּשִׂיא שֶׁלּוֹ נוֹתֵן לֵב לְהָבִיא כַּפָּרָה עַל שִׁגְגָתוֹ, קַל וָחֹמֶר שֶׁמִּתְחָרֵט עַל זְדוֹנוֹתָיו (ספרא):

אשר נשיא יחטא — The word אשר is connected in meaning with ‎‎‏אשרי “happy”. Happy is the generation whose prince (king) takes care to bring an atonement sacrifice even for an inadvertent act of his; how much the more certain is it that he will do penance for his wilful sins (Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Chovah, Section 5 1; Horayot 10b)

או הודע. כְּמוֹ אִם הוֹדַע הַדָּבָר; הַרְבֵּה אוֹ יֵשׁ שֶׁמְּשַׁמְּשִׁין בִּלְשׁוֹן אִם, וְאִם בִּמְקוֹם אוֹ, וְכֵן אוֹ נוֹדַע כִּי שׁוֹר נַגָּח הוּא (שמות כ"א):

או הודע is the same as “IF” (אם‎) [THE THING] WAS MADE KNOWN TO HIM — There are many passages where או is used in the sense of אם, and again where אם stands in the place of או. A similar instance is: (Exodus 21:36) “או נודע כי שור נגח הוא”, which means “if it was known that the ox was wont to thrust” (cf., however, Rashi on that verse and our Note thereon).

הודע אליו. כְּשֶׁחָטָא הָיָה סָבוּר שֶׁהוּא הֶתֵּר, וּלְאַחַר מִכָּאן נוֹדַע לוֹ שֶׁאִסּוּר הָיָה:

הודע אליו IT WAS MADE KNOWN TO HIM — when he committed the sin he was under the belief that it was something permissible, afterwards it became known to him that it was a forbidden thing.

במקום אשר ישחט את העלה. בַּצָּפוֹן שֶׁהוּא מְפֹרָשׁ בָּעוֹלָה:

במקום אשר ישחט את העלה [AND HE SHALL SLAUGHTER IT] IN THE PLACE WHERE THEY SLAUGHTER THE BURNT-OFFERING — on the north side of the altar which is expressly mentioned in the case of the burnt-offering (Leviticus 1:11) (Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Chovah, Chapter 8 5).

חטאת הוא. לִשְׁמוֹ כָּשֵׁר, שֶׁלֹּא לִשְׁמוֹ פָּסוּל (ספרא):

חטאת הוא IT IS [TO BE] A SIN-OFFERING — Consequently, if he slaughtered it for the purpose of (i. e. having in mind that it is) a sin-offering it is valid, but if it is not done for this purpose (i. e. that the officiating priest had another sacrifice in mind) it is invalid (Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Chovah, Chapter 8 6; Zevachim 10b; cf. also Rashi and Zevachim 5b).

ואת דמו. שְׁיָרֵי הַדָּם:

ואת דמו [AND HE SHALL POUR OUT] THE BLOOD — i. e. the remainder of the blood (cf. Rashi on v. 7).

כחלב זבח השלמים. כְּאוֹתָן אֵמוּרִין הַמְפֹרָשִׁים בְּעֵז הָאָמוּר אֵצֶל שְׁלָמִים:

כחלב זבח השלמים [AND HE SHALL CAUSE ALL ITS FAT TO ASCEND IN FUMES], AS THE FAT OF THE SACRIFICE OF PEACE OFFERINGS — i. e. as those fat portions which are specified in the case of the goat that is mentioned among the peace-offerings (Leviticus 3:14, 15).